issue5 一道机警高频，大家再看看，谢谢先了！

coolblazeverestUID: 189260

Issue5  第2篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
Body1. The advantages of the unification of national curriculum.
Body2. The drawbacks of over-centralization of curriculum.
Body3. The insufficient aspects of the conducting of curriculum all by local governments; and the combination of national arrangement and local participance.
------题目------
A nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college rather than allow schools in different parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer.
------正文------
In this assertion, the author claims that a nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college rather than allow governments in different parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer. While I agree with the author that in order to ensure majority of students can receive high quality education and avoid the imbalance development of the students’ knowledge frame in different districts, the nation has the responsibility and duty to provide an elementary curriculum in the nation wide, but to same extant, different parts in a country should have the space to conduct some particular courses which are beyond the reach of the nation.

Courses which are provided by national government must conduct the mainstream of the education, and convey the accentuated personalities of a race. It is very necessary for the students to establish orthodox viewpoint towards their country, history, race, and politics, and give them an overall world view towards their society and outside world. Moreover, because of the strong backup of the nation finance and the concentration of educational authorities in nation wide, the quality and authority of the curriculum supervised by nation are guaranteed.

However, there also emerge drawbacks of this restricted curriculum. This kind of undue conducting to the education may cause negative effects, such as the potential harm to students, which may be difficult to avoid due to the coherence of the curriculum. Tracing back to history, the Japanese dictator unified the curriculum to induce its people they were superior to other races; Hitler conducted uniform education to German that Jews were low ethics and it was honorable for the Nazi to annihilate them, all those are the horrifying consequences of over-centralization of education management. Thus, once education becomes the tools for someone to fulfill his or her own evil interest, the uniform of curriculum seems like the vector of the horrific spirits. Although they are the extreme examples towards the drawbacks of over unifying the curriculum, it is very necessary for the students not only being arranged by only one kind of consciousness, and the compensation from other ways, such as the thoughts from local educators, is obviously crucial to help them acquire something from other angles.

Admittedly, if the country does not restrict the curriculum of all the schools, it has potential to cause another kind of extreme: all the schools can offer the courses which they regard important, the consequences may be the students cannot receive enough courses which are necessary or basic for them to listen, speak, read, write and calculate etc, and the quality of the education is open to doubt. Therefore it is easily to comprehend that providing enough courses which can be adopted by all the students as the necessary courses and giving the freedom to the local authorities or schools to provide some courses by themselves which can be assimilated by the local students. Accordingly, the quality of the education can be guaranteed through the students receiving the instructed fundamental knowledge; the schools can provide some extra courses which they have the ability to conduct; and the students can choose the courses which they really interest in.

To sum up, if the country can give a portion of the curriculum which they regard important and necessary, and provide some freedom to the local governments and schools, it has high probability to be a wise way to solve the problem. And as far as I know, many countries indeed execute this kind of policy to their education system.

flyingwindUID: 189320

开头换以下啊,"In the argument"

呵呵,好象不是issue啊

coolblazeverestUID: 189260

谢谢提醒，这是个bug!

改成assertion吧！

flyingwindUID: 189320

And as far as know, many countries definitely execute this kind of policy to their education.
这种错误也有啊

ZHGsunnyUID: 185312

思路不错。不过我个人觉得，开头可以再精简精简，正文第一段有点单薄。

coolblazeverestUID: 189260

to: sunny
谢谢你的建议，我主要是想突出统一课程的坏处，对他的优点，就一带而过了，body2，3是重点。
考完了还能帮我看，真的很感激！！:)

ZHGsunnyUID: 185312

看看这篇文章，希望对你有所帮助。
Issue5

------题目------

A nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college rather than allow schools in different parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer. 一个国家应该要求所有的学生在上大学前都学习相同的国内课程，而不是允许不同地区的学校决定自己的教学课程。

------提纲------

Position: 平衡观点。

正：

1.从文化整个角度：统一的课程设置可以――促进民族、种族的融合，形成共同的文化价值。

2.从教育角度:
A.从受教主体（学生）角度：统一的课程设置可以――保证他们知识结构的完整性。

B.从施教主题（老师，学校，国家教委）：统一的课程设置可以――确保高中毕业生达到一个共同的标准，有利于后期的大学教育

反：
1.从文化整合的角度：
A.建议未必能施行，特别对那些多语言、种族、宗教信仰的国家而言。

B.一味的强调文化的整合会导致种族、民族间的矛盾与冲突，更加背离了教育的目的：促进民族、种族融合，形成共同的文化认同的初衷。

2。 从教育角度：
A.统一的课程会抹煞学生的特性，不能让他们根据自己的兴趣、爱好选择自己喜欢的课程，不利于他们身心的发展。

B.进而，从社会的角度，教育出来的都是完全一样的“产品”，造成人才结构的不合理化。

合：
1．在推广compulsory curriculum 的同时，各地区要根据当地的民族、种族、文化传统开设相应的保护他们文化的additional course。

2．此外，要根据学校的实力，开设一些 elective course， 以满足不同学生兴趣发展的需要。

------正文------
Should a nation require all its students to study the same curriculum before they enter college? The speaker thinks so, however, I cannot agree with the statement totally. In my opinion, a country has to not only draft a national compulsory curriculum but also encourages different high schools to provide some additional courses concerning the prospective of education and culture.

Admittedly, a same national curriculum can make sure that nearly all the high school students have complete and necessary knowledge structures, which are necessities for their college study or future. Common sense tells us, the curriculum drafted by nation will probably under many experts’ discussions and published eventually. Thus, this national curriculum is authoritative and reasonable. Follow this curriculum; all the high school students will get some basic abilities and knowledge, such as reading, counting, thinking, communicating and etc. And those will be useful for almost all the high school students, whatever they will choose to become an engineer or a writer in the future. Furthermore, the establishment of a same national curriculum can get a fundamental standard, which is necessary for the proceeding education in college. Just for example, if Mike never know what computer really is, while others can easily make programs in Java (a computer language). How can a teacher teach? It is a trouble indeed. From this prospective, a uniform curriculum can get rid of such imbalance in education to a large degree.

Moreover, a same national curriculum will promote culture fusion in the regions where people have different languages, in various races or have special religions. Since misunderstanding and prejudice among people mainly derived from their dissimilar thinking and educational background. Therefore, if a same curriculum can be carried out in those areas, probably, with the uniform courses they adopted and the increasing exchange, they will understand each other gradually. It is known that China has 56 races while they all live in peace and calm with each other in most of time. Why? The key is Chinese government had pressed such a same compulsory curriculum of 9 years all over China in 1975, which is also suit for other 55 races. Thanks to this curriculum, many minority leaders have well trained. Nowadays they all play a significant role in working on the better interaction between minority and majority. So, from this view, a same national curriculum imposes a great impetus on the culture interaction.

However, every sword has two blades. So is this topic. If we only have just one choice and provide no alternatives, we may face a social problem that, our high school students are all identical, without any differences, which denies the aim of education. The goal of education system is cultivating a complete person not only with smart brain and strong body but also having his/her own interest and specialty. Admittedly, the only one curriculum cannot meet various needs, so, it is necessary to for different high schools offer their own special courses to satisfy students’ requests. Just like some high school in East China, especially in Hunan Province, where hold plenty of rivers and lakes. Thus, some high schools provide sports course in water. And lots of Olympic winners are come from there. Fu Mingxia is an excellent illustration, who gets 3 Olympic gold medals in just 12 years. And the only one curriculum cannot make such effect.

Simultaneously, it is possible that the popularization of only one curriculum in those minority regions will cause disharmony, since any compulsory requirement may cause dislike even hate in the extreme. Just like a saying goes, "Things will develop in the opposite direction when they become extreme". It is the same with this issue. Each race has its own culture, which maybe spread from one generation to another. Due to this tough continuity, the more compulsory request adds onto them, the more resistance they will react. Hence, it is necessary to offer some additional courses for those minorities, so as to maintain their unique civilization.

All in all, from the discussion above, we can make a conclusion that a nation should have both a compulsory curriculum and some local additional courses. From the education point, a same curriculum can help students build a strong structure of knowledge, while some elective courses may cultivate students' interest. And from the civilization point, a same curriculum may promote exchange within different races and get culture fusion. While some provincial classes may protect the diversity of various cultures. In a nut shell, we need both: a same compulsory national curriculum and several elective courses

haiyaUID: 187989

In this assertion, the author claims that a nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college rather than allow governments in different parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer. While I agree with the author that in order to ensure majority of students can receive high quality education and avoid the imbalance development of the students’ knowledge frame in different districts, the nation has the responsibility and duty to provide an elementary curriculum in the nation wide, but to same extant some extent, different parts in a country should have the space to conduct some particular courses which are beyond the reach of the nation. 精简一下，我喜欢背景+立场+限定（如果有的话）可以快点进入主题

Courses which are provided by national government must conduct the mainstream of the education, and convey the accentuated personalities of a race. It is very necessary for the students to establish orthodox viewpoint towards their country, history, race, and politics, and give them an overall world view towards their society and outside world. Moreover, because of the strong backup of the nation finance and the concentration of educational authorities in nation wide, the quality and authority of the curriculum supervised by nation are guaranteed.作为让步的话加admittedly，这样给ets一个提示；作为观点的话，就太单薄了

However, there also emerge drawbacks of this restricted curriculum. This kind of undue conducting to the education may cause negative effects, such as the potential harm to students, which may be difficult to avoid due to the coherence of the curriculum. Tracing back to history, the Japanese dictator unified the curriculum to induce its people they were superior to other races; Hitler conducted uniform education to German that Jews were low ethics and it was honorable前后半句主语复数形式不一致 for the Nazi to annihilate them, all those are the horrifying consequences of over-centralization of education management. Thus, once education becomes the tools for someone to fulfill his or her own evil interest, the uniform of curriculum seems like the vector of the horrific spirits. Although they are the extreme examples towards the drawbacks of over unifying the curriculum, it is very necessary for the students not only being arranged by only one kind of consciousness, and the compensation from other ways, such as the thoughts from local educators, is obviously crucial to help them acquire something from other angles.统一课程统一思想后的坏处

Admittedly, if the country does not restrict the curriculum of all the schools, it has potential to cause another kind of extreme: all the schools can offer the courses which they regard important, the consequences may be the students cannot receive enough courses which are necessary or basic for them to listen, speak, read, write and calculate etc, and the quality of the education is open to doubt. Therefore it is easily to comprehend that providing enough courses which can be adopted by all the students as the necessary courses and giving the freedom to the local authorities or schools to provide some courses by themselves which can be assimilated by the local students. Accordingly, the quality of the education can be guaranteed through the students receiving the instructed fundamental knowledge; the schools can provide some extra courses which they have the ability to conduct; and the students can choose the courses which they really interest in.are interested in

To sum up, if the country can give a portion of the curriculum which they regard important and necessary, and provide some freedom to the local governments and schools, it has high probability to be a wise way to solve the problem. And as far as I know, many countries indeed execute this kind of policy to their education system.
我觉得这篇文章的致命伤在于b2中的论述。因为文章说全部是同意课程的极端例子会导致种族歧视和迫害，我觉得这并不是统一课程本身带来的，它的功能是统一，错误在于国家意识。从功能上讲它是完成了大家齐心协力的功能。如果说统一课程的弊端是思想上完全同一甚至有nazi倾向的话，那我们还是不要同一思想了。 这个论点的导出就有点可怕了。

coolblazeverestUID: 189260

谢谢sunny的建议，那篇文章我已经学习过了，受益匪浅！naiba的思维和各位的点评都很精彩！
尤其是pooh的修改尤其值得学习！
谢谢haiya的修改！ 至于body2，我本意是想强调课程统一，会使课程制定的错误扩大化，因为课程是国家思想的载体，这样错误的国家思想就随课程留传开来了，因此造成不良后果。并非单独的课程统一就是坏事，而是这么做有可能出现危害，作为一种potential理解，希望这样能解释清。
文章我再看看，能不能smooth点。
总之谢谢:D